Dems- please quit whining about Garland

[Polishprince]

The problem with naming Garland to replace Scalia was problematic as it tampered with the delicate political balance on the Court

Installing a 5th member of the Impermeable Liberal Wall would make the court a rubber stamp for every leftard policy there is.

 

[Coyote]

The problem with naming Garland to replace Scalia was problematic as it tampered with the delicate political balance on the Court

Installing a 5th member of the Impermeable Liberal Wall would make the court a rubber stamp for every leftard policy there is.

No,

Here is the problem.

It is not and should not be based on partisan crap. A president has a right to nominate a replacement. Are you telling me if Ginsberg steps down you would nominate a liberal?

 

[Thinker101]

The problem with naming Garland to replace Scalia was problematic as it tampered with the delicate political balance on the Court

Installing a 5th member of the Impermeable Liberal Wall would make the court a rubber stamp for every leftard policy there is.

No,

Here is the problem.

It is not and should not be based on partisan crap. A president has a right to nominate a replacement. Are you telling me if Ginsberg steps down you would nominate a liberal?

Sure...if hell froze over.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

But even before Obama had named Garland, and in fact only hours after Scalia's death was announced, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell declared any appointment by the sitting president to be null and void. He said the next Supreme Court justice should be chosen by the next president — to be elected later that year.

And so if they went through the process and he was still voted down, would you on the left have been any happier? Would you not be bringing it up today?

It's more temper tantrum nonsense. Kavanaugh only received one Democrat vote, and the only reason for that is because we already had enough votes to confirm.

Garland is a moderate with a sterling record. If Republicans refused to seat him on party line vote...they would have looked really bad. He likely would have been confirmed...but we'll never know because McConnell refused to even consider giving him even a hearing

And the Democrats don't look bad by voting party line on Kavanaugh as well?

Did they?

Not to Democrats they didn't. I'm sure most if not all were behind the vote. They don't worry about the optics when it's their people. But when Republicans do it.................

 

[Coyote]

But even before Obama had named Garland, and in fact only hours after Scalia's death was announced, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell declared any appointment by the sitting president to be null and void. He said the next Supreme Court justice should be chosen by the next president — to be elected later that year.

And so if they went through the process and he was still voted down, would you on the left have been any happier? Would you not be bringing it up today?

It's more temper tantrum nonsense. Kavanaugh only received one Democrat vote, and the only reason for that is because we already had enough votes to confirm.

Garland is a moderate with a sterling record. If Republicans refused to seat him on party line vote...they would have looked really bad. He likely would have been confirmed...but we'll never know because McConnell refused to even consider giving him even a hearing

And the Democrats don't look bad by voting party line on Kavanaugh as well?

Did they?

Not to Democrats they didn't. I'm sure most if not all were behind the vote. They don't worry about the optics when it's their people. But when Republicans do it.................

I am sure the Pubs do the same